Knepper v. Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

Track this case

Case Number:

3:18-cv-00304

Court:

California Northern

Nature of Suit:

Other Statutes: Arbitration

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action

Judge:

William H. Orrick

Firms

Sectors & Industries:

  1. January 01, 2019

    California Cases To Watch In 2019

    California attorneys will see the news cycle converge with the courtroom in 2019, as women take their fight for workplace equality to the halls of BigLaw; the Golden State battles it out with President Donald Trump over immigration and the environment; Apple fights its latest epic IP war; and cryptocurrency begins to reckon with federal securities law.

  2. May 29, 2018

    Ex-Ogletree Atty Fights Bid To Move $300M Gender Bias Suit

    An ex-Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC attorney urged a California federal judge to keep her $300 million putative gender discrimination class and collective action against the firm in the Northern District, arguing that moving the dispute would put class members at an unfair disadvantage.

  3. May 14, 2018

    3 Ex-Ogletree Deakins Attys Enter $300M Gender Bias Suit

    Three former Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC attorneys have added their names to a $300 million gender discrimination class and collective action against the firm, according to an amended complaint filed Friday in California federal court, which also added Ogletree Deakins' managing shareholder as a named defendant.

  4. April 27, 2018

    Ogletree Wants To Move Atty's $300M Gender Bias Suit

    Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC asked a federal court on Friday to transfer to the Central District of California an attorney's $300 million proposed class action alleging the firm's male-dominated leadership discriminates against women, saying the attorney was "forum shopping."

  5. January 16, 2018

    Ogletree Atty Hits Firm With $300M Gender Bias Class Action

    An Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart PC attorney has hit the management-side powerhouse with a $300 million proposed class action in California federal court alleging the firm's male-dominated leadership disproportionately favors men over women in pay, promotions and business development opportunities.